Alasdair, this is close to what I mean and the quote is apt.

I would prefer to say that reflection is not just "useful" but the
mechanism of development or change. We "reflect" one thing (say our past)
against others things (say our current experiences and future hopes), to
arrive at new (innovative) directions (or next steps).

This to me is why the language of learning matters.  Kolb describes the
mechanism of individual learning as the connection of theory and practice
through reflection and experimentation. Argyris describes action science
(participatory action research by another name) as a means of connecting
research with development by moving everyone on together in a collaborative
inquiry. Schon describes the "reflective practitioner" as a practitioner
who can make sense of their lived experience by theorising about the
meaning of consulting room encounters.  Interesting that the recent NHS
review of change (Managing change in the NHS, London School of Hygiene and
Tropical Medicine (Tel 020 7612 7980) free and worth reading), includes
action research and the learning organisation as 2 of the 4 approaches to
change that make a difference. These are all related concepts when
considering the relevance of the metaphor of a complex adaptive system to
the social order.

The fractal, to remain true to its use in the natural sciences, needs to be
a pattern that cannot be reached but is predictably there.  A pattern that
appears at a place where things moving and things static simultaneously
impinge. It seems to me that the search for meaning in the present is such
a pattern. This is a process of "making sense" of life. As Ray Ison says
(and it seems also Elliott) "the future and the past are different ways of
being in the present".  The present too may therefore be considered to be a
fractal.

Paul

At 11:23 AM 11/12/01 +0000, you wrote:
>So Paul
>
>To counter the seductive but dangerous disorder of cerebralitis I understand
>that you are saying:-
>
>it is valuable and important to reflect on the
>richness of our day to day living
>so that we can
>bed down the meaning that we make of our own lives
>in the reality of our own living.
>
>(something about reflecting on the qualities of who we are both
>In relation to each other and our environment).
>
>You talked about making sense of your past and future
>I am reminded of the first and last lines of TS Elliot's poem
>Burnt Norton in Four Quartets (1945)
>
>http://www.geocities.com/lavenderwater37/poetry/timepresent.htm
>
>Time present and time past
>Are both perhaps present in time future
>And time future contained in time past.
>If all time is eternally present
>All time is unredeemable.
>What might have been is an abstraction
>Remaining a perpetual possibility
>Only in a world of speculation.
>What might have been and what has been
>Point to one end, which is always present.
>.
>.
>.
>Go, go, go, said the bird: human kind
>Cannot bear very much reality.
>Time past and time future
>What might have been and what has been
>Point to one end, which is always present.
>
>
>
>So how to 'bear' the present as a way to better
>See the 'fractal' past and 'fractal' future
>Either of ourselves or each other?
>
>My problem is about how to think and FEEL about these
>Things amongst groups of people as well as single individuals.
>This is I guess the Complex Adaptive System you are mentioning.
>
>
>Something about our collective identities
>The weave and or TANGLE of our mutually reflecting narratives.
>
>The reflection of the richness of each one of us
>In the 'practice' of what we all do - if we can bear it...
>TS Elliot says it better than me.
>
>
>I hope the introduction of my MOTHER into the conversation
>Brought the conversation a little down to earth.
>She does for me :-)
>
>Happy Chanukah
>(begins on December 10, 2001 and ends on December 17, 2001)
>
>Alasdair
>
>
>
>
>
>On 11/12/01 9:32 am, "Dr Paul Thomas" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> I agree Alasdair. One problem I perceive is that these kinds of debates the
>> world over happen at a cerebral level and I want to bring it down to earth
>> - to where people are living out their lives. I want to explain why this
>> ordinary human activity explains the use of the explanatory model of a
>> complex adaptive system.
>>
>> The "process stuff" could be interpreted as being nice, using specific
>> models of teambuilding and having a warm room to meaningfully have quality
>> time together.  Up to a point I would also say this. However to get at the
>> heart of what this means I prefer so say that what is going on is that
>> everyone is struggling to develop the "narrative identity" of their own
>> unique lives (after Alasdair MacIntyre). We are all the lead actors in the
>> feature film that is my lfe and the support actor in the feature films of
>> many others. In the interactions I have everyday with others (and with
>> myself) I develop this film as I develop my identity and culture.  For this
>> reason I think that Karl Weick is a seminal thinker about complexity, even
>> though he does not use the word. He talks about "sensemaking".
>>
>> A complex adaptive system therefore is the appearance that all of this
>> interactivity takes as each reacts to, and adapts with, others (Stacey
>> describes "complex responsive processes"). The fractal is that repeatable
>> pattern in all of this that is to be seen in impossible to reach places (as
>> in the square root of a negative number oir the swirl of water going down a
>> plug hole).  We know it is there but can't touch it without altering it.
>> The fractal might be that point in the present where my past and future
>> make sense to me and also to "the whole" emerging story - the fractal is
>> meaning, or love? Plot that on a bar graph!
>>
>> Happy Christmas.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> At 04:39 PM 8/12/01 +0000, you wrote:
>>> At an organisational level I think a deep engagement and understanding of
>>> the 'process stuff' is fundamental to genuine transformation taking place.
>>>
>>> This is my bug bear with the work out of the Plexus Institute. There has
>>> been a considerable amount of work done by organisational development
>>> practitioners trying to make sense of this stuff and they come along
from a
>>> background of quality assurance and  write and talk with
>>> Scant reguard to the history or the intellectual integrity of what has
>>> Become before.
>>>
>>> Because of the absence of reflection by the Plexus Group about what they
>>> Espouse in contrast to what has been enacted (there has been no formal
>>> evaluation of their work as such) I asked them explicitly about CHRIS
>>> AGYRIS' work as he has spent most of his career examining this.
>>> I got complete silence. It is not acknowledged by the Edgeware book
either.
>>>
>>> I did however get some feedback from them. They (Kurt Zimmerman) suggested
>>> that I might try to be nice, which I am trying to take to heart. Perhaps
>>> Ma was right after all:-)
>>>
>>> If anyone wants a copy of the Edgware book to  read they are very happy to
>>> borrow mine. I will send it to the first person that asks (gift culture:-)
>>>
>>> Could be a lucky stocking filler
>>>
>>> Alasdair
>>>
>>
>
>----------------------------
>[log in to unmask]
>Mobile 00-44-(0)776-0221780
>Home   00-44-(0)20-7228-3939
>